Spiritual Confusion

[Nehemiah6]

sounds like: If King James’s English was good enough for Jesus and St. Paul, it’s good enough for me

Let's not get into a caricature of the King James Bible. If you have a beef with it, use whichever corrupt modern Bible you wish. Could the KJB be brought up to date? Yes. Has it been brought up to date? Yes. Is it still OBJECTIVELY the best English Bible? Yes.

 

[Nehemiah6]

If it ever had any authority, it was limited to the Anglican church.

Your comments have no merit, since all you are trying to do is denigrate the KJB. No one in compelling you to use it, so keep on using your corrupt translation (whichever one you choose). But facts are facts. Not only did the KJB become the Authorized Version for the Anglican Church, but it became THE Bible for all Christians who speak English for 300 years, and continues to remain the only Bible for thousands of Christians who reject the modern corrupted Bibles. And that is the bottom line. As to that handful of so-called "mistakes" or "errors" which were posted, they are not even worth addressing (that is why I ignored them), when you look at the serious mutilation of the text in modern versions.

 

[Dino246]

Let's not get into a caricature of the King James Bible. If you have a beef with it, use whichever corrupt modern Bible you wish. Could the KJB be brought up to date? Yes. Has it been brought up to date? Yes. Is it still OBJECTIVELY the best English Bible? Yes.

Objectively? Since when is there an objective standard of "best" to which all English-speaking Christians submit? This is your opinion only.

Your comments have no merit, since all you are trying to do is denigrate the KJB.

You are incorrect. First, you haven't a hot clue what I'm trying to do; you can't read my mind, and I haven't stated my goals. Second, you made "high and mighty" comments regarding the KJV; I countered them; simple as that.

No one in compelling you to use it, so keep on using your corrupt translation (whichever one you choose). But facts are facts. Not only did the KJB become the Authorized Version for the Anglican Church, but it became THE Bible for all Christians who speak English for 300 years, and continues to remain the only Bible for thousands of Christians who reject the modern corrupted Bibles. And that is the bottom line.

Ah, the vaunted "bottom line" statement, as though it had any weight. When you make such statements about the KJV, and they don't stand up to criticism, you go on the attack. What a sad substitute for rational discussion.

As to that handful of so-called "mistakes" or "errors" which were posted, they are not even worth addressing (that is why I ignored them), when you look at the serious mutilation of the text in modern versions.

This is a logical fallacy called "tu quoque". I'll leave it up to you to do your own homework. Needless to say, your argument is thereby invalidated.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Let's not get into a caricature of the King James Bible. If you have a beef with it, use whichever corrupt modern Bible you wish. Could the KJB be brought up to date? Yes. Has it been brought up to date? Yes. Is it still OBJECTIVELY the best English Bible? Yes.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

that's not my line and it certainly is not a caricature and you attempting to say I am making fun are out of line

I'm not doing that and I would not do that. some of that superior KJV only is showing through

that's actually a pretty common expression and I'm surprised you never heard of it

 

[7seasrekeyed]

and of course nothing whatsoever to say about the errors in the KJV

quite telling. try to say I am making fun to skip over having to discuss the errors...only a few of which I posted

and all of that and more, is why the KJV only threads kind of sputter out after a while

prob like this one will because the real questions do not get the time of day while the posts become personal

nothing new under the sun...a line from another king